25 March 2016

In the first publication of the Oera Linda Book (1872 and 1876), translator Dr. Ottema made two big mistakes - in my opinion -, that were copied by Sandbach in his English edition (1876).

These mistakes are particularly curious, since the owner of the manuscript, Cornelis Over de Linden tried to prevent them in the correspondence they had previous to the publication.

1. Translation of "OD" as "hate"
2. Manipulation of the alphabet page

~ ~ ~1. Translation of "OD" as "hate"

In their correspondence, Ottema and Over de Linden sometimes discussed parts of the translation, for example when Cornelis wrote (November 8, 1871):

You want to replace the word 'od' with 'animosity'. On page 128 I find
FIAND for enemy. I would rather see you use 'fertilising force' - or a
more appropriate term. The word animosity will cause animosity. [Ottema
would later change 'animosity' in 'hatred'.] When one speaks to youths
about love, they will fall in love. But when one speaks to them of war,
they will separate in groups and play soldier, to the great pleasure of
despotism.

In 1534 Martin Luther has used Odem for 'God's breath', which is what we might call life force. The old Dutch word odevaar for stork suggests a link with fertility. The Old Greek word ὠδις (ódis) can mean birth. In the Westfrisian dialect, oôt or oot is used for an indestructible weed (wild oat). All this supports Cornelis' suggestion to use something related to fertility or life force*.

* odd in Norse means point, tip, head, top, peak; odin means one (1) in Russian; in Dutch slang, oeteren is to urinate and oetlul is dickhead. Hod(e) is an old word for testicle. While 'life force' is a rather abstract concept, the simple, original meaning of od may have been penis. Indeed, that is what naturally has to enter a woman to make her pregnant.

But Ottema ignored this. He later wrote to Cornelis' son Leendert Floris Over de Linden (January 26, 1876):

Od (anger, rage, hate, animosity) trad to-ra binna, means
that hate entered the hearts of the three daughters of Irtha [Earth]; this hate
was obviously inherited by all of their descendants, and this is cause
of the inborn, innate animosity specially in Finda's and Lyda's
posterity against Frya's children. An animosity that will not end
until the people of Finda and Lyda will be exterminated, and the people
of Frya at the final victory will remain and inherit and possess the
whole earth.
This animosity dominates all of history in the OLB and still goes on in
our days. Frya's people pervade in all continents and establish European
supremacy all over the earth. Everywhere the peoples of Finda and Lyda
will have to submit or disappear.

Let us now look at the original fragment and how it appeared in the first Dutch and English editions:

manuscript page 6, lines 28-30
Note the dot between DRÁMA and WR and there is none between ALDA.S and OD

transliteration Ottema 1872, p.12

footnotes below transliteration Ottema 1872, p.12

Footnotes translated:

(*) Wr.alda. Always written as a composite word, meaning: the over-old or most ancient one, the primal being.
(†) Od, root of Latin odi, I hate.

translation Ottema 1872, p.13 - "Haat trad tot haar binnen"

translation Sandbach 1876, p.13 - "Hatred found its way among them"
(he used the same transliteration and footnotes as Ottema)

Ottema also missed the dot between DRÁMA and WR.ALDA.S and placed one between WR.ALDA.S and OD. It should be:

Once they were ripe,they got dreams of fruits and nuts (or: pleasure and delight).Wralda's od (life force, seed or penis) entered them.

~ ~ ~

2. Manipulation of the alphabet page

Cornelis Over de Linden (1811-1874)

Perhaps because Old Frisian specialist De Haan Hettema had written that the curly RUNSKRIFT (or walking script) letters looked like the 19th century longhand, Ottema decided to change the alphabet page altogether. Over de Linden wrote him about this decision (June 11, 1872 ~ Dutch original here):

A request for revision, says W. de L. in Spectator magazine of 21
October 1871 # 42, the same I ask you, and all who reject the so-called
'RUN-SKRIFT' as of younger date.

In your translation I read: "Oh dear, never let the eyes of a monk gaze upon this script, they speak sweet words, but... etc."

From this fear of monks I dare conclude, that they had already captured
many of our old manuscripts. I also dare believe that the Over de
Lindens have not been the only ones, who possessed the book of Adela Follistar.
When I follow the history of the manuscript, I dare assume that the
Romans, the Phoenicians, the Greeks and all Mediterranean peoples
learned the letterscript from us.

Not copied from the geometric lines of the Jol, but from less neatly produced Frisian manuscripts.

In the times when I tortured myself trying to read the handwriting,
someone said to me that they might be Phoenician letters. So I looked
for a book about the Phoenician language and found one with the title: "Paläographische
Studien über phönizische und punische Schrift - Herausgegeben von D.
Wilhelm Gesenius. Mit 6 lithographirten tafelen. Leipzig 1835."

The letters in that book are very different, but many of them are
similar to the STAND and the RUN-SKRIFT as presented in the manuscript.
Many or most of the prints of tokens with letters, depict women's heads,
that reminded me of the Frisian honorary Mothers. The author says that
every Phoenician colony had its own letterscript. But I could not follow
him, because he compared the letters with Hebrew ones, which I don't
know.

If my notion is right, we have been the lettergivers of all
Mediterranean peoples. As the Nordic peoples always have been - and
still are - the real sea dogs, the French with all their
elevated theories not excluded, they were also most in need of letters
and ciphars.

That the monks, who have invented their own letterscript, stifled ours
to make it unreadable, lies in their nature. But who knows how many Copies of the book of Adela's Folstar remain here and elsewhere with kings or in Rome. Now that more than a thousand years have passed, they may have introduced the walking script as capitals, because they are similar to our capitals.

If you are so weak as to reject the walking script, out of fear for some barkers, than it is as if you want to duel with the sheath, while passing the sword to them.

For in the manuscript it says: "When Fàsta
was Mother of honor, she made the running or walking script out of it.
The Witking, that is sea king Godfried... etc." So, if the runscript
was added more recently, then the above fragment was also added, and
then anything can have been added. So I keep protesting against the
mutilation.

In one of my videos, I also argue that the curly 'walking script' is in several ways completely different from the 19th century longhand and no reason to reject OLB's authenticity.

These are the alphabet and numerals in the original manuscript, pages 46-47:

And this is how it appeared in Ottema (1872, 1876) and Sandbach (1876):

This created misunderstandings and played into the hands of critics. (I will try to find back examples and add them later.)

16:35 Mistake. In 1806 a brother of Napoleon became the first king. The current kingdom started in 1815. I was confused with the year Belgium seceded, 1830.

16:40 "The Frisian Society (Fries Genootschap) might not have been founded, if king Willem I [(1772–1843)] would not have convoked all 'fatherlandic historians and linguists' by Royal Order of 23 December 1826, to submit proposals for the concoction of a 'General Netherlandic History'.Until then an enterprise like that had not been undertaken, despite of 'the great importance of such a history, that aims at cultivating love for the fatherland, stimulating civic virtue and maintaining the national character'.At this occasion he had also promised money for plausible proposals, even if they would not be awarded."
From: "Om de erfenis van Friso ~ 175 jaar Fries Genootschap" by Goffe Jensma, published in "Het Fries Genootschap 1827-2002" (2002), chapter 3, p.26.

39:55 About the mythological first mother of the whites, Frya, and her 'Tex" (primal teachings or laws), see p.13, p.17 and p.19-23 Sandbach

40:05 About burgs (citadels), (folk-)mothers and maidens, see laws on p.25-31 Sandbach

45:45 "If an army leader would have defeated a big enemy...": Rights of Mothers and Kings (army leaders), Sandbach p. 37:

11. If a king has conquered a dangerous enemy, his successors may
take his name after their own. The king may, if be wishes, choose an
open piece of ground for a house and ground; the ground shall be
enclosed, and may be so large that there shall be seven hundred steps to
the boundary in all directions from the house.
12. His youngest son may inherit this, and that son's youngest son after him; then it shall return to the community.

41:15 About the 'Golden Age' and its end (big flood etc.), see Sandbach p.67-71 and p.71.

49:35 About the invasion of eastern Scandinavia by an Asian tribe ca. 2100 BCE (Æsir?), see p.73-79 Sandbach; how Denmarks were lost ca. 600 BCE, see p.111-117.

51:00 Forum posts by "FromFinland" about Ynglinga Saga, see here and here.

52:00 OLB and its advocates ridiculed: In 1871 and 1872 a.o. by Spectator magazine; see here (Dutch language only). Later (1876) in particular by Vinckers (Dutch only).

52:33 Arguments for authenticity ignored: Those in Ottema's introduction of 1872 and 1876 edition as well as his booklet (1873) "Geschiedkundige aanteekeningen en ophelderingen bij Thet Oera Linda Bok". Vitringa (1874) made some good points too.

52:53 Must be 1927: "Het Geheim van het Oera-Linda-Book" by Dr. M. de Jong Hzn. This theorizes that linguist Eelco Verwijs would have been OLB's creator.

13:00 Jensma (2004; page 17): This Ottema was followed by a long row of believers of suspicious character. Of them SS-Führer Heinrich Himmler is the most notorious, but he was certainly not the only one. Theosophists, nazis, New Agers and right extremists of various sorts proclaimed and still proclaim this OLB to be an authentic and important source of our knowledge of western civilisation.
Original text: Deze Ottema kreeg een lange stoet van gelovigen van bedenkelijk allooi achter zich aan. De SS-Führer Heinrich Himmler is van hen de beruchtste, maar hij was zeker niet de enige. Theosofen, nazi's, New Agers en Nieuwe Rechtsen van allerlei pluimage verklaarden en verklaren dit Oera Linda-boek nog steeds voor een authentieke en belangrijke bron voor onze kennis van de westerse beschaving.

15:40 Building plan fragment (1941) of the "SS-Ordensburg Wewelsburg", based on 6-spoke wheel shape, sent to me by a reader of this blog:

22:30 Return of colonists from India and the Mediterranean back to Fryasland, p.163-177.

22:55 "GERMANIOI (also Karmanians, Carmanians), name of an ancient Persian
tribe engaged in farming (Herodotus 1.125). Since this is the only
mention of this name by Herodotus (it is absent from his list of
Darius’s tributaries and Xerxes’s contingents), one may identify it with
the name of Karmanioi, mentioned by Stephanus of Byzantium
(Pauly-Wissowa, X/2, cols. 1955-56). Nearchus later refered to them as
inhabitants of Carmania (q.v.), and observed that “they lived like the
Persians, with whom they were neighbors and were similarly equipped for
war” (Indica 38.1)." source
Also see forum posts here, here, here and here.

In the accounts of Liudgert no names are given of planes where the Frieslanders lived in India. We only know that they first established themselves to the east of the Punjab, and afterwards moved to the west of those rivers. It is mentioned, moreover, as a striking fact, that in the summer the sun at midday was straight above their heads. They therefore lived within the tropics. We find in Ptolemy (see the map of Kiepert), exactly 24° N. on the west side of the Indus, the name Minnagara; and about six degrees east of that, in 22° N., another Minnagara. This name is pure Fries, the same as Walhallagara, Folsgara, [...]

The content of Liudgért's diary is confirmed by the travel journal of
Nearchus which is partly saved by Arrianus in "Anabasis Alexandrou".
Nearchus writes, that the land between the arms of the Indus was called
"Pattala" in the Indian language, but the inhabitants called it "Delta",
indicating that they were Frisians, since "delte" means "low land" in
Frisian. He further names their city Pattala, but he is wrong, since
Arrianus (Periplus Erythraei maris) names Minnagara
as the city of Pattalene. (See my introduction p. XIV.) Nearchus does
not name Wichhirte and Liudgert, but he distinguishes them as firts and
second commander: "archón" and "hyparchos" for seaking and rear admiral.

24:05 From wikipedia: "Floris II, Count of Holland (or Floris the Fat) (born ca. 1085 in Vlaardingen, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands; reigned 1091 – March 2, 1121) was the first from the native dynasty of Holland to be called Count of Holland. [...] In 1101 he was endowed with the title of Count of Holland by the bishop of Utrecht, after acquiring Rhineland (Leiden and surroundings) ('comes de Hollant', up until that time the counts' dominion had been officially referred to as Frisia)."

"In German, vampyr is still commonly used next to blutigel ('bloodsucker', leech). The word is purely Frisian and composed of vam (wan) and pyr that is worm; the literal meaning is thus; an evil or dangerous worm. The Dutch language has the expression: I don't want to be the kwade pier (evil worm)." (my translation)

I rather think VAM means belly, so VAM-PÍR is a belly-worm or thick worm, as opposed to the regular slim worms:

The writing of Dela-Hellenia [OLB p.134-141]0 is one of the most
remarkable parts. I named her Burgh-maiden or Mother of the Geartmen.
That these Geartmen, named Patalians by the Greek writers, had a Mother
(in dialects pronounced: Moer), appears from Quintus Curtius Rufus;
Book IX, chapter 8, line 28: "Rex erat MOERIS" (their king was Moeris).
For he read from the Greek historians: ΑΥΤΩΝ ΕΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣΕ ΜΟΕΡΙΣ, and he
translated εβασιλευσε as rex erat (was king), not
considering that βασιλευειν (to rule) can also be said of a woman. It is
unclear from whom Curtius has this information; Ptolemy, Megasthenes,
Nearchus or Hephaestion. Perhaps the latter noted, that the Patalians
for important matters sought Moderis réd (advice, consent or command of the Mother), and assumed, that Moderis
(or Moeris) was the name of the one (unknown to him) with the highest
authority, which made him write ΜΟΕΡΙΣ as as if it were a name. This is
how Curtis got his "rex Moeris", unknowingly and unconsciously saving
for us the memory of a Mother of the Geartmen.

Instead of "they were ruled by Moeris", it may indeed have to be re-interpreted as "they were ruled by a Mother".

04 March 2016

The Oera Linda Book has been discussed in a thread at unexplained-mysteries.com. From its start in June 2010 till now (March 7, 2016), there have been 18,609 posts. No definite proof for OLB being a19th century fabrication, or against its authenticity as a 13th century copy of older originals has been posted, so far.

Some of the most common arguments that have been given, will be summarised and refuted in this post:

1. A linguistic study would have proven OLB to be fake.
2. OLB would contain modern words and syntax.
3. The paper would have been made in the 19th century.
4. OLB would contain etymologies and historic claims that can't be true.
5. Over de Linden's account of how he had obtained the manuscript varied, indicating he lied.
6. The creators would have been convincingly unmasked in 2004.

The main misunderstanding is, that language must have 'evolved' (or degenerated) in a linear or exponential way and that the oldest (accepted) sources are a reflection of spoken language. The development may in fact rather have been cyclic; After many wars, including the violent and destructive christianisation process, language might actually have regenerated, specially the written form. Words and expressions that may have been used in small circles only for a long while, may have become more common again later. Post-christianisation written language may in time have gradually become more a reflection of spoken language, rather than a Latin inspired attempt to reproduce (or manipulate) it.

Hoax theorists usually refer to "De onechtheid van het Oera Linda-Bôk, aangetoond uit de wartaal waarin het is geschreven" (The falseness of the Oera Linda Book, as proven by the the gibberish in which it was written) by J.B. Vinckers (1876, Netherlands).

First of all, it is suspect, that the alleged evidence was never translated (not even a summary) from Dutch, although there has always been some international interest. But this on itself does not yet prove that the evidence is worthless.

The author appealed to ridicule and emotional, strong language to make his points. His work did not lead to general consensus, but since the press took his side, opposing views were silenced and opponents intimidated. This also does not mean that he did not also bring forth any good arguments.

J.B. Vinckers

Exemplary quotes (translated):

"this monstrous absurdity" ~~~ "linguistic madness" ~~~ "hundred times more scandalous [...] than essay in a foreign language by a student, who dares to step on the slippery ice of a final exam without any linguistic preparation." ~~~ "The language in which this product was written, is a most detestable mishmash, gibberish, made by someone not ignorant in other topics, but absolutely unaware of the primal grounds of the linguistics of related German languages in general, and of the Old Frisian language in particular; a gibberish, nothing better than Negro-English; a gibberish, that makes the OLB to a disgrace in the line of most weighty remains of the Old Frisian language." ~~~ "A miserable hodgepodge of old and young, such a misfit of babel, that on every page, no in every line of the 126 printed pages, reveils its fake birth to the eye of the specialist through indisputable proof."

"I was recently informed that the late Mr. De Haan Hettema also declared the language of the OLB to be Frisian, older than that of the Old Frisian laws!! It's almost incredible."

M. de Haan Hettema

That De Haan Hettema (1796-1873) was indeed a specialist of Old Frisian - much more so, in fact, than Vinckers (1821-1891) - is demonstrated by this selection of publications by him:

[A part about Hübner will be added somewhere else.]At least some 'critics' in National-Socialist Germany saw in the OLB "... a political danger, as it suggests that Slavics would have lived in current eastern Germany, before the Germanic peoples." (translated from "Buchfieber – Zur Geschichte des Buches im 3. Reich" by G. Simon e.a., p.21)This alone would have been enough reason in 1934 to suppress public discussion about the OLB.

2. OLB would contain modern words and syntax.

Two examples of words that would be too modern for OLB to be authentic are BEDRUM (p.82/21; bedroom) and SKELTA BI THÉR NACHT or SKELTA.BI.NACHT (p.53/28 and p.66/2; Dutch 'schout-bij-nacht': rear-admiral).

The Online Etymology Dictionary states that the oldest records of 'bed-room' are from around 1600, but the words 'bed' and 'room' are both much older. Why would it be impossible or even improbable that the combination might have been used earlier?

The oldest known records of 'schout by nacht' are from around the same time, early 1600, but in these records the word is not explained. Therefore it will already have been known and nobody can know for how long.

Some words exist long in oral language, before they are written down. Also, our oldest written records are only a fraction of what once must have existed.

Our oldest accepted sources in what is called Old Dutch, Old German etc. were written by monks who had learned to read and write in Latin. Their earliest attempts to write in one of the many spoken dialects will have been more clumsy, than the later ones. Not only will they gradually have become better at representing individual words, also the syntax will have moved from a Latin inspired word order (aimed primarily at transferring information) to a more natural reflection of spoken language.

The dialects, some of which still exist in more rural areas, may have changed much less than the standardised languages, since they were passed on from mother to children, rather than from schools as has only happened in the last few centuries.

Icelandic is a good example of a language that has hardly changed over the last 1000 years, since the Icelanders have consciously decided long ago that they wanted to preserve their language.

The syntax of Dutch and German are very similar. It is clear that they stem from the same ancestral language, which can easily be much more than 2000 years old. In studying the age of languages, it might be much better to examine dialects, rather than old written records.

So in the end, that words or syntax would be too modern, merely is an argument from incredulity, which is a fallacy (variant of argument from ignorance):

P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.

Let me add that the OLB also contains many words that are still not understood, while many have been clarified only recently, in the forum-discussion that I mentioned earlier. In some cases, the syntax is very different from that of modern Dutch or German.

3. The paper would have been made in the 19th century.

Paper and ink have never been properly investigated. In 1876 a book trader and a paper maker had a look at one page and decided, based on the pattern of waterlines, that the paper had to have been machine-made and thus from the 19th century, not considering the fact that 13th century Arab paper has exactly the same waterlines.

A more recent attempt to date the paper assumed beforehand, that it had to be from the 19th century, not even considering the possibility that it could be medieval after all. The results are vague and contradicting and a final report was never published. It is clear that they did not get the results they had hoped for.

The text of the OLB could be authentic, even if the paper is modern, since it could be a copy of an older original. Even hardcore hoax-theorists admit this. But if the paper turns out to be medieval after all, it can hardly be forgery. A serious, decisive investigation should be possible with modern techniques. That this was never done thus far by the archive that guards it, is suspect.

4. OLB would contain etymologies and historic claims that can not be true.

Examples of etymologies that often are considered too 'silly' for OLB to be authentic are NÉF.TÜNIS (kinsman Tunis) for Neptune and HIMMEL.LÀJA (lead to/ lie in the heavens) for Himalayas.

To some, such suggested etymologies make sense, but even if they were made up by an ancient author and far from the 'real' etymology, it would not make OLB fake.

There exist books from earlier centuries, containing etymologies that we would now laugh about, but that does not mean that these books must be recent fabrications. So-called 'folk etymology' may very well be a phenomenon of all times.

5. Over de Linden's account of how he had obtained the manuscript varied, indicating he lied.

There are several conflicting versions of the story describing how Cornelis Over de Linden had received the manuscript: in his correspondence with Verwijs and Ottema, his diary and witness accounts by Jacob Munnik and Hein Kofman. (Details see here: April 2011.)

My suggestion is that he tried to cover up something that was embarrassing to him: He may have tried to get it from his relatives and in the end took it by force or without their consent. This would explain all conflicting information. They are relatively small lies that in no way exclude the possibility that the manuscript is authentic.

I want to point out here that the Over de Linden family does not have to be descendant in a straight line from the Oera Linda's who compiled the manuscript many centuries earlier. It is possible that Cornelis' forefather chose this modern version of the family name, because he was the proud owner of the manuscript and able to read (parts of) it.

In 2004 Goffe Jensma was promoted to Doctor at the Theological Faculty Groningen with his study about the OLB and his dissertation was published as "De Gemaskerde God". Two years later his new Dutch translation of the OLB was published. His study is not about the question whether or not OLB is authentic, but, assuming that it is fake, he theorised who could have created it and why.

Three days after Jensma's promotion, a discussion was organised where other specialists were invited to speak:

For Jensma's theory to be right, many people must have lied: Over de Linden, Verwijs, HaverSchmidt and all the various witnesses who confirmed to have heard about the manuscript before it should have been fabricated. Such a conspiracy is in theory possible, but not likely.

Jensma later became professor Frisian language and culture at the University of Groningen, was involved in an educational television production that included one episode about the OLB, and was supervisor of the failing recent paper investigation. He has all the while been presenting his theory as if it were an accomplished fact, despite the initial scepticism of his colleagues.

By ridiculing in strong terms people who consider the possibility that OLB might be authentic, Jensma has created a difficult situation for himself, because his scorn will fall back on his head, when he turns out to have been wrong after all. It is only human, that he will use his academic power - as long as he has any - to keep up the myth that he has reinforced.

suche / zoek / soek / sök / søk / søg / seek/ sykje

F R Y A ~ S K É D N I S E

the early speech of our fore-fathers

"The pure Friesic and easy wording of the Oera Linda Book must be most welcome to students of English and Saxon, as a widening of the now too narrow ground of the early speech of our fore-fathers." Wm. Barnes. Macmillan's Magazine,April 1877, p. 465.

Video Studies

Cornelis Over de Linden (1811-1874) Den Helder

Eelco Verwijs (1830-1880)

first scholar who studied the manuscript and confirmed its authenticity (1867) - later he withdrew this conclusion, probably to save his career

Jan Ottema (1804-1879) Leeuwarden

first translator and publisher of the 'Oera Linda Bok' (1872 & 1876)

the oldest production of European literature

"We may thus accept that we possess in this manuscript, of which the first part was composed in the sixth century before our era, the oldest production, after Homer and Hesiod, of European literature. And here we find in our fatherland a very ancient people in possession of development, civilisation, industry, navigation, commerce, literature, and pure elevated ideas of religion, whose existence we had never even conjectured."Dr. J.G. Ottema, 1871 (translation Sandbach)